The porn perfect boob sex videowar between little devices that you jam into your ear canal continues without end.
This week, U.K. tech startup released the follow-up to 2021's surprisingly really good Ear (1) wireless earbuds. About a year and a half later, Ear (2) is here with promised enhancements to sound quality and battery life, a new $150 price, and the same cool transparent plastic look from before.
SEE ALSO: Apple's AirPods might one day help you hear betterAs such, it's time to get to work doing the thing you have to do with any new pair of wireless earbuds: Compare them to AirPods. Specifically, the third-gen $170 model that's closest to Ear (2) in price. Here's how the two audio devices stack up.
You May Also Like
Design
Nothing's earbuds. Credit: Nothing 
Apple's earbuds. Credit: Molly Flores/Mashable The most subjective category by far, physical design is also probably the least important thing about any pair of earbuds. They're for listening to, not looking at. That said, as the writer of this article, I declare Nothing the winner in the looks department, without much of a contest. In fact, they basically look the same as Ear (1), a design so cool it didn't need to be changed.
I just think transparent plastic casing on technology is cool. AirPods definitely look nice, fitting naturally into Apple's antiseptic plastic white aesthetic, but they aren't nearly as eye-catching. That said, the third-gen AirPods are comfortable to wear for long sessions, as are Nothing's earbuds. Neither of these devices is a loser here so much as one of them is just a little cooler than the other.
Winner: Nothing Ear (2)
Customization
This one almost isn't fair.
As a sort of entry-level option without a lot of higher-end features like active noice cancelation (more on that in a minute), the third-gen AirPods naturally don't have much in the way of settings to play with. Sure, you can turn off automatic in-ear detection or lower the volume of sound effects, but that's about it.
You stick them in your ear, listen to whatever you want to listen to, and then take them out. This is a perfectly valid approach to technology, but unfortunately it doesn't look as nice next to what Nothing has to offer.
Ear (2) setup requires downloading the Nothing X app from the App Store or Play Store. It takes a minute, but it's worth it. Nothing X gives users the ability to adjust noise cancelation, remap touch commands, and even take a test to find out if the silicone ear seals fit properly in your ears. It's not a mind-blowing number of options, but it's more than what Apple offers.
Oh, and you can access those options on an Android phone, unlike AirPods.
Winner: Nothing Ear (2)
Sound quality
Apple packs a lot of punch into something so small. Credit: Molly Flores/Mashable Sound quality is tougher to compare because it requires side-by-side testing that I'm not currently equipped to do. With that in mind, though, it's worth noting that Apple has always had excellent sound quality in its earbuds, and reviews from outlets like The Verge and Wired have heavily praised the sound in Ear (2). You probably can't go wrong here.
The thing that sets Nothing apart in this category for me is the presence of active noise cancelation. This feature has become so standard in earbuds in this price range that it's frankly a little absurd that the cheapest AirPods with ANC are $250. One of these devices will let you keep listening while a train rolls by and one of them won't. It's as simple as that.
Winner: Nothing Ear (2)
Battery life
As for battery life, Apple can go home knowing it picked up at least one win today, though it sort of comes on a technicality.
Related Stories
- The Galaxy Buds 2 Pro are a no-brainer for Samsung fans
- AirPods (third-gen) vs. Beats Fit Pro: Which Apple wireless earbuds are the ones to get?
- The new AirPods Pro look old but sound fresh
- Nothing launches Ear (2) earbuds with noise cancellation and hi-res sound
- The best wireless earbuds: Our top 10 picks for the best sound on the go
Nothing rates Ear (2) for up to 6.3 hours of playback on a single charge with ANC turned off. Turn ANC on, however, and they're only rated for four hours of playback. ANC is such a huge selling point of Ear (2) compared to the third-gen AirPods that I can't really imagine using them with it off for any extended period of time.
On the other hand, Apple rates its ANC-less AirPods for six hours of playback on a single charge. It's a little less than what Nothing offers in ideal conditions, but in terms of practical use, Apple wins this one.
Winner: AirPods
The Verdict
You can probably tell where this is going.
Nothing Ear (2) is a superior product to the third-gen AirPods in most of the ways that matter. They look cooler, have more features, and sound better by virtue of including ANC. They're also $20 cheaper than Apple's $170 earbuds and work better with Android phones. It's not that close of a competition.
Still, Apple's earbuds are totally fine and might be preferable if you don't care about ANC or just want something that works seamlessly with your iPhone. Neither of these earbuds are bad; one of them is just better than the other.
Winner: Nothing Ear (2)
Topics Apple